How heavy is your touring rig?

[Mofro261]

The weighting is the hardest part.

[TheK12]

Example 1:
- DGamms weighs approximately 66kg with nothing on.
- His total dynamic touring setup weight (hands and feet) for his light kit is approximately 3380gm
- DGamms ratio: 3380/66 = 51.2

Thoughts?? Is a golden ratio of 50 too low or too high? Perseverate and pontificate freely.

Lord knows most of us don’t have anything else to do

Isn't this just calculating what percentage dynamic weight is of total weight so the number should be expressed less of a ratio and more of a stated percentage.

Based on the example above, the touring rig is 3380 g / 66000 g = 0.051 so his touring rig is essentially 5% of his weight. I'm sure that up to a certain point, there may be a linear relationship between touring rig weight and skier weight but after that point, the weight of the rig is too heavy regardless of skier weight. Having said that, I think keeping your rig at or below 5% of skier weight seems a reasonable starting point?

[MakersTeleMark]

https://youtu.be/GEbomXdHiIQ

Heavy.

[YaBoyBlue]

DGamms ratio: I’m 6’ 1” and 185 lbs/84 kg, so raven setup at 4700g gives 56. If I swapped the Shift for a Zed, it would be spot on 50.

I was surprised my $25 poles (Black Crows Oxus) are only an ounce heavier then the überpole (BD Helios)


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[DGamms]

MoFro: love the Tom Petty reference!

TheK12: you are totally correct. I’m in a weird line of work where I think in grams per kg a lot. But maybe it’s better to think of this as a percentage.

YaBoyBlue: yeah, those BC Oxus poles look great for touring, especially the handle wrap. I had a deal to get the Helio poles at 50-60% off, otherwise would have probably opted for something like the Oxus.

[GeezerSteve]

Having said that, I think keeping your rig at or below 5% of skier weight seems a reasonable starting point?

Maybe I'm missing something, but, unless you're touring with a monoski, a rig is a pair of skis + bindings + boots + skins, so that would put your ideal threshold at 10% of body weight, no?

My lightest touring ski + binding + boot + skin per foot is a wee over 3% of body weight, i.e., a bit over 6% for a pair of ski+binding+boot+skin combo -- and that's cuz I'm bigger than your average ski tourist.

[::: :::]

Despite the weight of my gear not really being a significant factor in my skinning speed (more weight to be lost on my body first), you guys have me intrigued...gonna measure my gear here soon since it’s either that or put it away in deep storage

(without starting a “covid weight loss” thread, I’ve actually dropped 10# since Feb, LOL)

[TheK12]

Maybe I'm missing something, but, unless you're touring with a monoski, a rig is a pair of skis + bindings + boots + skins, so that would put your ideal threshold at 10% of body weight, no?

My lightest touring ski + binding + boot + skin per foot is a wee over 3% of body weight, i.e., a bit over 6% for a pair of ski+binding+boot+skin combo -- and that's cuz I'm bigger than your average ski tourist.

Hmmm.... good point.. But maybe the idea of dynamic weight was how much weight you are moving when skinning so it's reasonable to assume that since you only move 1 leg at a time when you step forward, that is the "dynamic weight".... But I'm just guessing here...

But yeah, as far as calculating your touring setup as a percentage of your weight, then you'd have to consider both skis, boots, skins, and poles. I'm sure there's some Phd student somewhere who loves ski touring that is trying to figure out the effects of touring setup weight on a skier's metabolic and work rate.

[XXX-er]

the year i was training lots I quantifyed the difference between a pretty light Mercury/ dynafit stoke/ rad1/ pomoca setup and a pretty heavy JJ/ FR+/ 4 buckle alpine as taking about 12-15 % more time to go the 4.2 kms up to the chair

[TheK12]

the year i was training lots I quantifyed the difference between a pretty light Mercury/ dynafit stoke/ rad1/ pomoca setup and a pretty heavy JJ/ FR+/ 4 buckle alpine as taking about 12-15 % more time to go the 4.2 kms up to the chair

what's the difference in weight in your setups? that would be an interesting number to compare it to your effort/time data.

[GeezerSteve]

Ski + binding weight can matter quite a bit when they are on your pack, especially when booting steep or scrambling.

the year i was training lots I quantifyed the difference between a pretty light Mercury/ dynafit stoke/ rad1/ pomoca setup and a pretty heavy JJ/ FR+/ 4 buckle alpine as taking about 12-15 % more time to go the 4.2 kms up to the chair

Not surprised to hear that. Weight is not the only factor. Boot ROM and FR+ pivot point/clunkiness matter too.

[XXX-er]

No idea, just comparing my heaviest touring setup vs my pretty light setup on a 1-1.5 hr skin track, so i tried to compare apples to apples, and the difference is real IME

the heavy setup is something a newbie might use compared to what an experienced ski tourer uses, on the lighter end but not even superlight

also consider the clothing, you see those same kind of folks also wearing the heavy gortex pants and jackets they bought for riding in-bounds usually soaked in sweat

whereas for touring I'm wearing much lighter soft shells and not sweating ... much

[frorider]

Too lazy to calculate for the quiver, but for my 188 camox fab/Alpinists (1890 g) + Scarpa F1 (1444) + skins (290 g) and my 86 kg weight, that’s a ratio of 42 using the single ski metric.

Re pole length...I’m 6’3” and have found 120 cm best for most ups and all descents. When breaking trail on a pow day I often lengthen just one pole to 135 cm.

[thecazdog]

Having said that, I think keeping your rig at or below 5% of skier weight seems a reasonable starting point?

Im guessing that's 10% with things being pairs and all, but yeah this is an interesting take.

I nerd out and keep a spreadsheet on setup weights, and if I stuck to the formula, my rig should be around 7.6kg all up. Im pretty comfortable with that weight, and often use setups more in the 8.3kg range, but anything above that gets emotional.

So maybe the 10% rule is a great starting point. If youre fitter/dumber/tougher you can always add, and if youre getting old and fat, subtract a bit.

[TheK12]

It's an interesting discussion to nerd out to especially in the current situation where not much skiing is going on for those of us that don't live in the mountains.

another interesting angle would be to "convert" your weight at foot to weight on back using the 1lb on foot to 5lbs on back "conversion" ratio. that would mean that setups in the 7Kg -10kg range would "equate" to 35kg-50kg on back, at least in terms of energy expenditure...

damn... time to do some step ups with a 100lb pack. (god i'm bored....)

[YaBoyBlue]

I like and appreciate the weight nerdery on display here, it’s all very illuminating for someone with no skimo background (but plenty of experience with cycling gram counting).

Coming from the opposite end of the ski spectrum however, and seeing that the initial question in the thread is “how heavy is your touring rig,” I think the DGamms ratio should be calibrated at 50 as a floor, not a starting point. The premise as I see it is how much weight are you willing to haul up a hill in order to have a quality experience on the down, and inherent in the question is a big fat compromise from your “normal” touring gear and experience.


Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums

[GeezerSteve]

The premise as I see it is how much weight are you willing to haul up a hill in order to have a quality experience on the down, and inherent in the question is a big fat compromise from your “normal” touring gear and experience.

That equation has validity if the tour's sole objective is the descent. For some tourists, that's always the goal, but not for others, at least not all the time. Sometimes skiing is the best mode of transport to tag a summit or do a mountaineering route or to get from Point A to Point B (and usually back to Point A).

[gregL]

That equation has validity if the tour's sole objective is the descent. For some tourists, that's always the goal, but not for others, at least not all the time. Sometimes skiing is the best mode of transport to tag a summit or do a mountaineering route or to get from Point A to Point B (and usually back to Point A).

I know some highly skilled skiers who take it as a challenge to try to ski well on the lightest possible gear, too, even though they could rip on a heavier setup. Different agendas for different folks.

[f=ma]

That equation has validity if the tour's sole objective is the descent. For some tourists, that's always the goal, but not for others, at least not all the time. Sometimes skiing is the best mode of transport to tag a summit or do a mountaineering route or to get from Point A to Point B (and usually back to Point A).

I know a guy who'll borrow his roommates touring setup strictly to go ice climbing. Damn fine ski tourer, just prefers to go climbing instead.

[XXX-er]

IME there is a sweet spot as to how much weight I can haul up and if i go too light i will have no control on the down

I seen this in a rando race where I was on lighter gear but the guy with more control beat me down

and he gained more time on the down than I could have made on the up

[jackattack]

The weighting is the hardest part.

Yes.

[galibier_numero_un]

IME there is a sweet spot as to how much weight I can haul up and if i go too light i will have no control on the down

I seen this in a rando race where I was on lighter gear but the guy with more control beat me down

and he gained more time on the down than I could have made on the up

^^^ +1 ^^^

Ya, so if I were to drop say, 400 grams per ski below my sweet spot, my partners are still faster than me on the up. I'm still trashed, and am on skis that my shaky thighs can't handle. It makes for a bad day.

There's definitely a sweet spot, and it's obviously an individual thing.

... Thom

[Ville]

Fast as lightning!

Lähetetty minun LYA-L29 laitteesta Tapatalkilla

[grinch]

Haa both sides of the spectrum for that waist width covered

Sent from my SM-G950W using TGR Forums mobile app

[smooth operator]

Fast as lightning!

Lähetetty minun LYA-L29 laitteesta Tapatalkilla

Fuck YEah! nice!